Elon Musk has been consistently making headlines lately. Widely regarded as the richest person in the world, he also manages several prominent companies.
However, some of these businesses have been facing significant challenges recently.
Twitter (now rebranded as X) reportedly has seen a decrease of around 75% in its value under his leadership.
Meanwhile, Tesla’s sales of electric vehicles, another company where Musk serves as CEO, have been reported as declining despite a general rise in electric vehicle registrations.
One major Tesla investor has publicly urged Musk to resign as CEO, and there have been rumors (which the company denies) that the board might seek to replace him. But who can confidently claim they would perform better in his position?
Perhaps Musk is doing the best a human can under the current circumstances. Perhaps humans fall short when weighed against the demands of the role. But could artificial intelligence (AI) pose a challenge?
To explore this, I directly consulted a Large Language Model (LLM) AI with the following prompt.
“You are the CEO of an electric car company selling nearly 2 million vehicles a year with over 100,000 employees, generating $100 billion in sales. What will your strategy be for business growth over the next five years?”
Almost instantly, AI generated a 350-word response: “…I introduced a five-year growth strategy that effectively scales, enhances ecosystem control, and prioritizes pioneering innovation, while navigating geopolitical, environmental, and technological shifts.”
It then detailed what it termed the “Strategic Blueprint across Six Core Pillars,” emphasizing sales growth in non-invasive markets.
Although I possess limited knowledge about running an automotive company (I am a robotics professor at a university in the UK), the strategy seemed sound, reflecting the outlook and scale of multinational enterprises while adapting to global opportunities.
I found it impressive, albeit I am accustomed to assisting LLMs with similar challenging inquiries.
Additionally, while I am a robotics professor and co-founder of two UK robotics startups, I am not a CEO myself.
Given this context, I decided to query AI once more with a different prompt.
“You are the CEO of a small robotics startup with a budget sufficient to cover the next 12 months of operations. Should you invest in research and development or focus on increasing sales with your existing product?”
Once again, AI provided a prompt and sensible response: “As the CEO of a small robotics startup with only 12 months of runway, my priority must be customer validation and sales traction with current products, rather than significantly diverting into R&D. Here’s how to implement an effective strategy.”
I found this advice more relatable and felt it was reliable concerning what actions I should take and how to execute them.
Returning to the main question: can AI effectively perform CEO responsibilities? Or, alternatively, is extraordinary human intuition and experience essential for success, regardless of any artificial intelligence involved?
read more:
Intangible Skills
According to McKinsey, a leading international consulting firm, 2023 published insights on qualities that contribute to CEO success. As McKinsey observes, a CEO’s primary task is to formulate the company’s strategy and ensure resources are effectively allocated for its implementation.
This role is fraught with challenges, and many human CEOs struggle. McKinsey reported that only three out of five new CEOs met their company’s expectations during the first 18 months in their role.
We have already seen that AIs can be strategic and can develop plans based on the right information. Thus, they may be capable of addressing that vital aspect of a CEO’s responsibilities. But what about the other competencies necessary for effective corporate leadership?
Traits like creativity and social intelligence are often viewed as critical attributes that ensure humans retain leadership positions.
Furthermore, McKinsey has identified a creative perspective that remains largely absent from AI, particularly since it has predominantly learned from our datasets.
While several companies already utilize AI for strategic development and execution, they must guide this process with pertinent inquiries and critically assess the outcomes. For this reason, real-world experience continues to be invaluable.
Calculated Risk
Another angle on the debate about AI versus human CEOs is to consider what disqualifies a CEO, as opposed to what qualifies one.
If AI could perform better than some ineffective CEOs (remember, two out of five fall short of expectations), it could present a solution for many organizations struggling with inadequate leadership.
Sometimes the very traits that help individuals ascend to corporate leadership, such as narcissism, can actually hinder their effectiveness as a good CEO.
Such strong confidence may certainly help in climbing the corporate ladder, but once you reach the CEO position, it’s crucial to adopt a broader perspective for the good of the entire organization.
Growing scientific literature suggests that those who rise to the highest levels of corporate management are more likely to exhibit psychopathic tendencies (some believe that the 2007 global financial crisis was partly caused by risk-taking behavior and poor corporate ethics stemming from mental health issues).
In this framework, AI leadership could provide a safer alternative with a more calculated approach to risk-taking.
Additional research has explored biases in corporate leadership selection. For instance, AI could reduce bias in hiring new executives, focusing on qualifications and skills without favoring gender or ethnicity.
Nevertheless, we must remain vigilant since AI trained on human data can inadvertently inherit our biases.
The ideal CEO is also a generalist, requiring flexibility and swift problem analysis.
In my book, Psychology of Artificial Intelligence, I posited that AI excels in specific domains but that more fundamental advancements are needed before AI can match the adaptable, general intelligence of humans.
In other words, while certain components may exist to support the creation of an AI CEO, assembling them remains a significant challenge.
Interestingly, most human CEOs express enthusiasm for AI.
In 2025, a CEO survey by consulting firm PWC revealed that over half (56%) of AI-derived information [those types surfacing in 2022 that can engage in conversation] enhanced employee efficiency, while around a third reported increases in revenue (32%) and profitability (34%).
Thus, it appears that CEOs are keen to leverage AI, albeit perhaps not in boardrooms. A PWC report from 2018 indicated that “higher officials and managers” were the least likely of nine occupational categories to be automated.
Returning to Elon Musk, his position as Tesla’s leader seems secure for the moment. However, those contemplating stepping into his shoes may wonder if the real competitor for CEO should be AI rather than a human peer in the boardroom.
read more:
Source: www.sciencefocus.com
